Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of antony.blakey@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.200.168 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references
         :x-mailer;
        b=j7rBeMNkBsbT96GqTUvX1JejEwcKMo3c4BV8YD38tD5XaJ/fjkmrrV2CIwq/9QDMd7
         lACxaERNILNPEGjqiExOfLrarmkAzGzEWzwn9yKLYgbXO/HmJVaAOEwQI5sPNOF2K68s
         FikznJ7uTPLSwNLxYrrkNoYWN3+7zNYwSnLiA=
Message-Id: <3E3930F6-105C-43B2-837B-F90EB632C75B@gmail.com>
From: Antony Blakey <antony.blakey@gmail.com>
To: user@couchdb.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <20090103135418.GD22715@tumbolia.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Subject: Re: Does CouchDB check autogenerated document id's?
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 00:47:06 +1030
References: <21939021.1440421230910477169.JavaMail.servlet@perfora>
 <46D7ECAF-8D5E-46D4-BFD3-302B3CB1DBEC@jasondavies.com>
 <e2111bbb0901020811i11a4f208t1ee58d2663a0f299@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F6E3427-CFDD-472E-BE2F-1E1CB6D04257@jasondavies.com>
 <214c385b0901021610p1289148dr5cf4e8522574b6f9@mail.gmail.com>
 <e282921e0901021652x982663eq88e1f26f85fe0c7c@mail.gmail.com>
 <20090103131218.GA22715@tumbolia.org>
 <CAA0F29F-85B7-4F88-8205-57F6D79382E4@gmail.com>
 <20090103134108.GB22715@tumbolia.org>
 <A97DB5F6-A64E-4255-8017-719FD8FDF4BC@gmail.com>
 <20090103135418.GD22715@tumbolia.org>


On 04/01/2009, at 12:24 AM, Noah Slater wrote:

> You lost me with this. Are we still talking about CouchDB here or  
> are we on an
> (interesting but unrelated) tangent?

A tangent, but the issue does impact Couch ...

> What has the limit of query strings to do
> with the decision to use POST vs. GET? Are you talking about the  
> situation where
> you want to pass in data to a GET request that would be too long (in  
> practice,
> the RFC doesn't specify a limit) for a query string? My rule of  
> thumb would be
> that if you find your self in that situation, you're doing something  
> that could
> probably be simplified.

The multikey get in Couch should be a GET, but it can't be unless you  
want you API to be limited by the (practical) limitation on URL length.

 From an API perspective, I think POST and GET mix up idempotency with  
the ability to have a payload or not, which in practical terms results  
in people using POST when they should use GET, because those two  
issues, whilst theoretically orthogonal, and not implemented that way.

Antony Blakey
-------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787

Borrow money from pessimists - they don't expect it back.
   -- Steven Wright